Cryptic preference for MHC-dissimilar females in male red junglefowl, Gallus gallus

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 276, Issue 1659, 2009, Pages 1083-1092

  Gillingham, Mark A F ^a   Richardson, David S ^b   Løvlie, Hanne ^a   Moynihan, Anna ^a,c   Worley, Kirsty ^a,b   Pizzari, Tom ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Genetic compatibility; Kin discrimination; Major histocompatibility complex; Mate choice; Sexual selection; Sperm allocation

Indexed keywords

CRYPSIS; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FERTILIZATION (REPRODUCTION); GAMEBIRD; IMMUNE RESPONSE; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY COMPLEX; MATE CHOICE; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SEXUAL SELECTION; TESTING METHOD;

GALLUS GALLUS; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 60049097620     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2008.1549     Document Type: Article

References (109)

1. Aeschlimann, P. B., Häberli, M. A., Reusch, T. B. H., Boehm, T. & Milinski, M. 2003 Female sticklebacks Gasterosteus aculeatus use self-reference to optimize MHC allele number during mate selection. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 54, 119-126.
2. Akaike, H. 1973 Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In Proceedings of the second international sumposium on information theory (eds B. N. Petov & F. Caski), pp. 267-281. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado.
3. Akaike, H. 1987 Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika 52, 317-332.
4. Akcay, E. & Roughgarden, J. 2007 Extra-pair parentage: a new theory based on transactions in a cooperative game. Evol. Ecol. Res. 9, 1223-1243.
5. Alcock, J. 1989 Animal behavior: an evolutionary approach. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
6. Aloni, R., Olender, T. & Lancet, D. 2006 Ancient genomic architecture for mammalian olfactory receptor clusters. Genome Biol. 7, R88.
7. Amundsen, T. & Forsgren, E. 2001 Male mate choice selects for female coloration in a fish. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 13 155-13 160.
8. Arcaro, K. F. & Eklund, A. 1998 A review of MHC-based mate preferences and fostering experiments in two congenic strains of mice. Genetica 104, 241-244.
9. Arnqvist, G. & Kirkpatrick, M. 2005 The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: The strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation behavior in females. Am. Nat. 165, S26-S37.
10. Bakst, M. R. & Cecil, H. C. 1997 Techniques for semen evaluation, semen storage, and fertility determination 4. Sperm motility and metabolism VII. In In vitro sperm-egg interaction assay utilising inner perivitelline layer from laid chicken eggs. Savoy, IL: Poultry Science Asociation.
11. Ball, M. A. & Parker, G. A. 2003 Sperm competition games: sperm selection by females. J. Theor. Biol. 224, 27-42.
12. Beauchamp, G. K., Yamazaki, K., Bard, J. & Boyse, E. A. 1988 Preweaning experience in the control of mating preferences by genes in the major histocompatibility complex of the mouse. Behav. Genet. 18, 537-547.
13. Beauchamp, G. K. & Yamazaki, K. 2003 Chemical signalling in mice. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 31, 147-151.
14. Bonduriansky, R. 2001 The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol. Rev. 76, 305-339.
15. Bonneaud, C., Chastel, O., Federici, P., Westerdahl, H. & Sorci, G. 2006 Complex Mhc-based mate choice in a wild passerine. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 1111-1116.
16. Bozdogan, H. 1987 Model selection and Akaike's information criterion (AIC): the general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika 52, 345-370.
17. Bozdogan, H. 2000 Akaike's information criterion and recent developments in information complexity. J. Math. Psychol. 44, 62-91.
18. Bretman, A., Wedell, N. & Tregenza, T. 2004 Molecular evidence of post-copulatory inbreeding avoidance in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Proc. R. Soc. B 271, 159-164.
19. Brown, J. L. 1983Someparadoxical goals of cells and organisms: the role of the MHC. In Ethical questions in brain and behavior (ed. D. W. Pfaff ), pp. 111-124. New York, NY: Springer.
20. Brown, R. E., Singh, P. B. & Roser, B. 1987 The Major Histocompatibility Complex and the chemosensory recognition of individuality in rats. Physiol. Behav. 40, 65-73.
21. Brown, J. L. & Eklund, A. 1994 Kin recognition and the major histocompatibility complex - an integrative review. Am. Nat. 143, 435-461.
22. Burley, N. 1977 Parental investment, mate choice, and mate quality. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 74, 3476-3479.
23. Byrne, P. G. & Rice, W. R. 2006 Evidence for adaptive male mate choice in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 917-922.
24. Carroll, L. S., Penn, D. J. & Potts, W. K. 2002 Discrimination of MHC-derived odors by untrained mice is consistent with divergence in peptide-binding region residues. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 2187-2192.
25. Chenoweth, S. F., Doughty, P. & Kokko, H. 2006 Can non-directional male mating preferences facilitate honest female ornamentation? Ecol. Lett. 9, 179-184.
26. Chenoweth, S. F., Petfield, D., Doughty, P. & Blows, M. W. 2007 Male choice generates stabilizing sexual selection on a female fecundity correlate. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 1745-1750.
27. Colegrave, N., Kotiaho, J. S. & Tomkins, J. L. 2002 Mate choice or polyandry: reconciling genetic compatibility and good genes sexual selection. Evol. Ecol. Res. 4, 911-917.
28. Consuegra, S. & de Leaniz, C. G. 2008 MHC-mediated mate choice increases parasite resistance in salmon. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 1397-1403.
29. Cornwallis, C. K. & Birkhead, T. R. 2006 Social status and availability of females determine patterns of sperm allocation in the fowl. Evolution 60, 1486-1493.
30. Cornwallis, C. K. & Birkhead, T. R. 2007 Experimental evidence that female ornamentation increases the acquisition of sperm and signals fecundity. Proc. R. Soc. B 274, 583-590.
31. Deutsch, J. C. & Reynolds, J. D. 1995 Design and sexual selection: the evolution of sex differences in mate choice. In Perspectives in ethology (ed. N. S. Thompson) Behavioral design, vol. 11, pp. 297-323. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
32. Eklund, A., Egid, K. & Brown, J. L. 1991 The major histocompatibility complex and mating preferences of male-mice. Anim. Behav. 42, 693-694.
33. Etches, R. J. 1996 Reproduction in poultry. Oxford, UK: CAB International.
34. Fan, W. F., Liu, Y. C., Parimoo, S. & Weissman, S. M. 1995 Olfactory receptor-like genes are located in the human major histocompatibility complex. Genomics 27, 119-123.
35. Freeman-Gallant, C. R., Johnson, E. M., Saponara, F. & Stanger, M. 2002 Variation at the major histocompatibility complex in Savannah sparrows. Mol. Ecol. 11, 1125-1130.
36. Freeman-Gallant, C. R., Meguerdichian, M., Wheelwright, N. T. & Sollecito, S. V. 2003 Social pairing and female mating fidelity predicted by restriction fragment length polymorphism similarity at the major histocompatibility complex in a songbird. Mol. Ecol. 12, 3077-3083.
37. Fulton, J. E., Juul-Madsen, H. R., Ashwell, C. M., McCarron, A. M., Arthur, J. A., O'Sullivan, N. P. & Taylor Jr, R. L. 2006 Molecular genotype identification of theGallus gallusmajor histocompatibility complex. Immunogenetics 58, 407-421.
38. Gage, M. J. G. & Morrow, E. H. 2003 Experimental evidence for the evolution of numerous, tiny sperm via sperm competition. Curr. Biol. 13, 754-757.
39. Glick, B. 2000 Immunophysiology. In Sturkie's avian physiology (ed. G. C. Whittow), pp. 657-685. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
40. Goto, R., Afanassieff, M., Ha, J., Iglesias, G. M., Ewald, S. J., Briles, W. E. & Miller, M. M. 2002 Single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) assays for major histocompatibility complex B genotyping in chickens. Poult. Sci. 81, 1832-1841.
41. Grafen, A. & Hails, R. 2002 Modern statistics for the life sciences. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
42. Griffith, S. C. 2007 The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: Neglected components of direct and indirect selection. Am. Nat. 169, 274-281.
43. Hoffman, J. I., Forcada, J., Trathan, P. N. & Amos, W. 2007 Female fur seals show active choice for males that are heterozygous and unrelated. Nature 445, 912-914.
44. Hurst, J. L., Thom, M. D., Nevison, C. M., Humphries, R. E. & Beynon, R. J. 2005 MHC odours are not required or sufficient for recognition of individual scent owners. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 715-724.
45. International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium 2004 Sequence and comparative analysis of the chicken genome provide unique perspectives on vertebrate evolution. Nature 432, 695-716.
46. Jacob, J. P., Milne, S., Beck, S. & Kaufman, J. 2000 The major and a minor class II beta-chain (B-LB) gene flank the Tapasin gene in the B-F/B-L region of the chicken major histocompatibility complex. Immunogenetics 51, 138-147.
47. Jager, I., Eizaguirre, C., Griffiths, S. W., Kalbe, M., Krobbach, C. K., Reusch, T. B. H., Schaschl, H. & Milinski, M. 2007 Individual MHC class I and MHC class IIB diversities are associated with male and female reproductive traits in the three-spined stickleback. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 2005-2015.
48. Janeway, C., Travers, P., Walshport, M. & Capra, J. 1999 Immunobiology: the immune system in health and disease. London, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd.
49. Jehle, R., Sztatecsny, M., Wolf, J. B. W., Whitlock, A., Hodl, W. & Burke, T. 2007 Genetic dissimilarity predicts paternity in the smooth newt (Lissotriton vulgaris). Biol. Lett. 3, 526-528.
50. Jennions, M. D., Hunt, J., Graham, R. & Brooks, R. 2004 No evidence for inbreeding avoidance through postcopulatory mechanisms in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus. Evolution 58, 2472-2477.
51. Johnstone, R. A., Reynolds, J. D. & Deutsch, J. C. 1996 Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50, 1382-1391.
52. Jones, I. L. & Hunter, F. M. 1993 Mutual sexual selection in a monogamous seabird. Nature 362, 238-239.
53. Jordan, W. C. & Bruford, M. W. 1998 New perspectives on mate choice and the MHC. Heredity 81, 127-133.
54. Kaufman, J., Milne, S., Gobel, T. W. F., Walker, B. A., Jacob, J. P., Auffray, C., Zoorob, R. & Beck, S. 1999 The chicken B locus is a minimal essential major histocompatibility complex. Nature 401, 923-925.
55. Kempenaers, B. 2007 Mate choice and genetic quality: a review of the heterozygosity theory. Adv. Study Behav. 37, 189-278.
56. Kennedy, L. J., Ryvar, R., Gaskell, R. M., Addie, D. D., Willoughby, K., Carter, S. D., Thomson, W., Ollier, W. E. R. & Radford, A. D. 2002 Sequence analysis of MHC DRB alleles in domestic cats from the United Kingdom. Immunogenetics 54, 348-352.
57. Kokko, H. & Monaghan, P. 2001 Predicting the direction of sexual selection. Ecol. Lett. 4, 159-165.
58. Kokko, H. & Ots, I. 2006 When not to avoid inbreeding. Evolution 60, 467-475.
59. Kotiaho, J. S., Lebas, N. R., Puurtinen, M. & Tomkins, J. L. 2008 On female choice, heterozygosity and the lek paradox. Anim. Behav. 75, E1-E3.
60. Landry, C., Garant, D., Duchesne, P. & Bernatchez, L. 2001 'Good genes as heterozygosity': themajor histocompatibility complex and mate choice in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Proc. R. Soc. B 268, 1279-1285.
61. Livant, E. J. & Ewald, S. J. 2005 High-resolution typing for chicken BF2 (MHC class I ) alleles by automated sequencing. Anim. Genet. 36, 432-434.
62. Lovlie, H., Cornwallis, C. K. & Pizzari, T. 2005 Male mounting alone reduces female promiscuity in the fowl. Curr. Biol. 15, 1222-1227.
63. Martin, P. A., Reimers, T. J., Lodge, J. R. & Dziuk, P. J. 1974 The effect of ratios and numbers of spermatozoa mixed from two males on proportions of offspring. J. Reprod. Fert. 39, 251-258.
64. Milinski, M. 2006 The major histocompatibility complex, sexual selection, and mate choice. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 37, 159-186.
65. Milinski, M., Griffiths, S., Wegner, K. M., Reusch, T. B. H., Haas-Assenbaum, A. & Boehm, T. 2005 Mate choice decisions of stickleback females predictably modified by MHC peptide ligands. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 4414-4418.
66. Neff, B. D. & Pitcher, T. E. 2005 Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol. Ecol. 14, 19-38.
67. Ober, C., Weitkamp, N., Cox, H., Dytch, D., Kostyu, D. & Elias, S. 1997 HLA and mate choice in humans. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 61, 497-504.
68. Olsson, M., Shine, R., Madsen, T., Gullberg, A. & Tegelstrom, H. 1996 Sperm selection by females. Nature 383, 585.
69. Olsson, M., Madsen, T., Nordby, J., Wapstra, E., Ujvari, B. & Wittsell, H. 2003 Major histocompatibility complex and mate choice in sand lizards. Proc. R. Soc. B 270, S254-S256.
70. Owens, I. P. F. & Thompson, D. B. A. 1994 Sex-differences, sex-ratios and sex-roles. Proc. R. Soc. B 258, 93-99.
71. Parker, G. A. 1979 Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects (eds M. S. Blum & N. A. Blum), pp. 123-166. New York, NY: Academic Press.
72. Parker, G. A. 1983 Male quality and mating decisions. In Mate choice (ed. P. Bateson), pp. 141-166. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
73. Parker, G. A. 2006 Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 361, 235-259.
74. Penn, D. J. & Potts, W. K. 1999 The evolution of mating preferences and major histocompatibility complex genes. Am. Nat. 153, 145-164.
75. Pilastro, A., Simonato, M., Bisazza, A. & Evans, J. P. 2004 Cryptic female preferences for colorful males in guppies. Evolution 58, 665-669.
76. Pizzari, T. & Bonduriansky, R. 2009 Sexual behaviour: conflict, cooperation and co-evolution. In Social behaviour: genes, ecology and evolution (eds T. Szekely, A. J. Moore & J. Komdeur). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
77. Pizzari, T., Froman, D. P. & Birkhead, T. R. 2002 Pre- and post-insemination episodes of sexual selection in the fowl, Gallus g. domesticus. Heredity 88, 112-116.
78. Pizzari, T., Cornwallis, C. K., Løvlie, H., Jakobsson, S. & Birkhead, T. R. 2003 Sophisticated sperm allocation in male fowl. Nature 426, 70-74.
79. Pizzari, T., Lovlie, H. & Cornwallis, C. K. 2004 Sex-specific, counteracting responses to inbreeding in a bird. Proc. R. Soc. B 271, 2115-2121.
80. Pizzari, T. & Snook, R. R. 2004 Sexual conflict and sexual selection: Measuring antagonistic coevolution. Evolution 58, 1389-1393.
81. Potts, W. K. & Wakeland, E. K. 1993 Evolution of Mhc genetic diversity - a tale of incest, pestilence and sexual preference. Trends Genet. 9, 408-412.
82. Ramon, D. S., Argüello, J. R., Cox, S. T., McWhinnie, A., Little, A-M., Marsh, S. G. E. & Madrigal, J. A. 1998 Application of RSCA for typing of HLA-DPB1. Hum. Immunol. 59, 734-747.
83. Reinhold, K., Kurtz, J. & Engovist, L. 2002 Cryptic male choice: sperm allocation strategies when female quality varies. J. Evol. Biol. 15, 201-209.
84. Reusch, T. B. H., Haberli, M. A., Aeschlimann, P. B. & Milinski, M. 2001 Female sticklebacks count alleles in a strategy of sexual selection explaining MHC polymorphism. Nature 414, 300-302.
85. Richardson, D. S., Komdeur, J., Burke, T. & von Schantz, T. 2005 MHC-based patterns of social and extra-pair mate choice in the Seychelles warbler. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 759-767.
86. Rubolini, D., Galeotti, P., Ferrari, G., Spairani, M., Bernini, F. & Fasola, M. 2006 Sperm allocation in relation to male traits, female size, and copulation behaviour in a freshwater crayfish species. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 60, 212-219.
87. SAS 2006 The GLIMMIX procedure. Cary, NC: SAS publishing.
88. Schwensow, N., Eberle, M. & Sommer, S. 2008 Compatibility counts: MHC-associated mate choice in a wild promiscuous primate. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 555-564.
89. Schü tz, K. E., Forkman, B. & Jensen, P. 2001 Domestication effects on foraging strategy, social behaviour and different fear responses: a comparison between the red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) and a modern layer strain. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 74, 1-14.
90. Shaw, I. et al. 2007 Different evolutionary histories of the two classical class I genes BF1 and BF2 illustrate drift and selection within the stable MHC haplotypes of chickens. J. Immunol. 178, 5744-5752.
91. Simmons, L. W., Beveridge, M., Wedell, N. & Tregenza, T. 2006 Postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance by female crickets only revealed by molecular markers. Mol. Ecol. 15, 3817-3824.
92. Skjødt, K., Koch, C., Crone, M. & Simonsen, M. 1985 Analysis of chickens for recombination within the Mhc (B-complex). Tissue Antigens 25, 278-282.
93. Sullivan, M. S. 1994 Mate choice as an information gathering process under time constraint - implications for behavior and signal-design. Anim. Behav. 47, 141-151.
94. Thuman, K. A. & Griffith, S. C. 2005 Genetic similarity and the nonrandom distribution of paternity in a genetically highly polyandrous shorebird. Anim. Behav. 69, 765-770.
95. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. 2000 Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Mol. Ecol. 9, 1013-1027.
96. Trivers, R. L. 1972 Parental investment and sexual selection. In Sexual selection and the decent of man 1871-1971 (ed. B. Campbell), pp. 139-179. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
97. Wallny, H. J. et al. 2006 Peptide motifs of the single dominantly expressed class I molecule explain the striking MHC-determined response to Rous sarcoma virus in chickens. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 1434-1439.
98. Wedekind, C. & Furi, S. 1997 Body odour preferences in men and women: do they aim for specific MHC combinations or simply heterozygosity? Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 1471-1479.
99. Wedekind, C., Seebeck, T., Bettens, F. & Paepke, A. J. 1995 Mhc-dependent mate preferences in humans. Proc. R. Soc. B 260, 245-249.
100. Wedell, N., Gage, M. J. G. & Parker, G. A. 2002 Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 313-320.
101. Wegner, K. M., Reusch, T. B. H. & Kalbe, M. 2003 Multiple parasites are driving major histocompatibility complex polymorphism in the wild. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 224-232.
102. Wolfinger, R. & O'Connell, M. 1993 Generalized linear mixed models - a pseudo-likelihood approach. J. Statist. Comput. Simulation 48, 233-243.
103. Worley, K., Gillingham, M., Jensen, P., Kennedy, L. J., Pizzari, T., Kaufman, J. & Richardson, D. S. 2008 Single locus typing of MHC class I and class IIB loci in a population of red jungle fowl. Immunogenetics 60, 233-247.
104. Wright, D., Kerje, S., Brändström, H., Schütz, K., Kindmark, A., Andersson, L., Jensen, P. & Pizzari, T. 2007 The genetic architecture of a female sexual ornament. Evolution 62, 86-98.
105. Yamazaki, K., Boyse, E. A., Mike, V., Thaler, H. T., Mathieson, B. J., Abbott, J., Boyse, J., Zayas, Z. A. & Thomas, L. 1976 Control of mating preferences in mice by genes in major histocompatibility complex. J. Exp. Med. 144, 1324-1335.
106. Yamazaki, K., Yamaguchi, M., Andrews, P. W., Peake, B. & Boyse, E. A. 1978 Mating preferences of F2 segregants of crosses between Mhc-congenic mouse strains. Immunogenetics 6, 253-259.
107. Yamazaki, K., Beauchamp, G. K., Kupniewski, D., Bard, J., Thomas, L. & Boyse, E. A. 1988 Familial imprinting determines H-2 selective mating preferences. Science 240, 1331-1332.
108. Yamazaki, K., Curran, M. & Beauchamp, G. K. 1999 Fetal MHC odor types play a functional role in regulating social interactions. Behav. Genet. 29, 375.
109. Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. 1997 The evolution of polyandry 2: post-copulatory defences against genetic incompatibility. Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 69-75.